When I hear the words "...repeal capital gains tax" - And I do, all the time, and always from Republicans - my blood literally boils. How can a party be saying this and nobody can see right through their corrupt intentions?
oh boyy!!!!!!! the party of NO!!!! the party who looks after only their self interest and not other peoples. ohh boyy!!! lets continue to bankrupt our country by lowering taxes for the rich, continue the quagmire in iraq, eleminate social programs for education, parks and recreation, disabled familiies, stem cell reseach, space exploration projects, and let everyone die who cant afford health insurance. BECASE like cain said, IF YOURE NOT RICH YOU'RE THE ONE TO BLAME GOD I HATE THAT ASSHOLE.
Suits & Ties Experts one and all blah blah blah on YT & TV, Got it all figured out dump more money on the wealthy, Suits crushing the people to bailout out their mess, Experts one and all at O.P.M. Chess, Blue tie you feel good Red tie your scared to shit, Blah blah blah just keep sucking corporate tit, Media suits, Government suits representing who and what, Those who wear suits while kicking your butt, With O.ther P.eoples M.oney & Global Chess, Suits addicted to their O.P.M. Mess.
One*Demand My*1040 + Control the funding & YOU+The*People Control Development & Corporations MUST LOBBY YOU+The*People One*Demand My*1040 Individual Directed Capitalization + iDC 65% of Your tax contribution directed & spent in the areas of public funding of YOUR CHOICE Power+2+The*Peaceful +My*1040+ Tea Party, Coffee Party, Any Party = The 99% DIVIDED-WE-FAIL Seize the Moral High Ground Unite the C.H.A.O.S. The Opportunity is N.O.W. Demand My*1040 Recovery Security Unity will Rapidly Develop
An independent analysis of Herman Cain's tax plan by The Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington think tank, said it would increase taxes on 84% of U.S. households, hitting low- and medium-income households the hardest. The analysis said that households making $10,000 to $20,000 would see whopping tax increases averaging $2,705 -- an increase of nearly 950%!
i love john huntsman, im a democrat, but huntsman is a brilliant and experienced guy. Perry, Romney, Bachman, The guy from Pennsylvania, and Gingrich are by the very definition of the word, frightening.
This video takes the debate out of context. For instance; Ron Paul talks about repealing "Sarbanes–Oxley", which was a failure enacted by the REPUBLICANS! In that part of the debate Ron Paul was telling the others that they have to look at the mistakes the Republican party has made as well, and not just criticize the Democratic policies.
Forget about Ron Paul. He is a lost cause and has no chance to be GOP Nominee. Ron Paul is dead last in the major polls and usually not even mentioned. You Paulamite cult members are a bunch of weirdos. Anyone who votes for Ron Paul is wasting their vote. Let us all say Amen.
A wall of text occurs when many keys are pressed in sequence and posted to a webpage. The many resulting words are then visible to other viewers for the foreseeable future. However, because there are so many words it is unlikely that the average viewer will read any of them. Likely they will merely skip over the text entirely, thereby ignoring the wall. For this and other reasons, a wall of text will rarely be voted up and will probably never be the top comment. Good thing there is a character l
Huntsman made a logical, rational statement. In response, they all looked at him like he's crazy. Santorum was almost there. He said we need to repeal all of them, and replace some. Which I guess would be like never repealing them in the first place.
Geez. Why actually watch the whole debate when you can just get quick, context free, easily misinterpreted soundbites? This is why the political discourse has such an attention deficit disorder.
yeah Repeal everything and take this country back to the dark ages, and take away any chanced of finding out how many of the GOP reps on this panel alone gained from the TARP funds not to mention the bad loans they invested in personally to sell overseas through these very banks AND the TARP money their wives took for their own personal businesses (or husbands, ahem, bachmann clinic perhaps?)
@itsafunthing2do Meh. The guy wants to return to the gold standard and he's a libertarian. This is the sign of an unserious and fundamentally flawed candidate. That being said, he's still the best they have...other than....say, some random guy they could have picked out of the audience.
@thefalconer So you prefer fiat currency... money based on nothing? Money based on debt? Money that loses value over time? That lost value is a tax on the poor.
And what, specifically, is wrong about being a libertarian? Is it the military non-interventionism? The opposition to the drug war and the PATRIOT Act? Or do you oppose the libertarian defense of marriage equality or free speech? Just which libertarian positions do you oppose?
@freesk8 There isn't enough gold on earth to back up the USD that exists, which is part of the reason that it became unworkable in the first place.
For all the flaws of libertarianism, just check out any country that has zero government (ie: Congo, Somalia). Think about the actual implementation of this ridiculous ideology, rather than the supposedly utopian dream.
@thefalconer With fractional reserve banking, we also have not enough value in banks to back up all the currency we have. So why is a gold standard worse? Only a fraction of the people will ever demand gold for their paper. But making such exchange possible give the paper real value.
The Congo is not a libertarian state. Neither is the Somalia. A libertarian state would have some defense of property rights, whether governmental or not. You've made a straw-man argument.
@freesk8 I never said either was a "libertarian state", which only exists in the minds of libertarians-so really there is no functioning model. It's an exercise of arguing practical realities (ie: anarchal states) vs. your utopia (whatever you imagine is libertarian mecca). I said that neither of those states has a government - they are the reality of removing a government from a state. Anarchy. Of course, this doesn't happen in the mythical world libertarians imagine.
@thefalconer Some libertarians are anarchists, some are minarchists.
But my original point was that a gold standard is better than the fiat currency we have, and that you have yet to point out a libertarian policy that you disagree with. All you can do is call us names and make straw-man arguments. Ah, well.
@thefalconer Give it up, man. Arguing with a libertarian is futile. They live in hypothetical world that allows them to move the goal posts whenever the arguments not going their way. Point to a failed examples of libertarian policies in other countries, they'll just say "that's not true libertarianism." Or "you just don't understand libertarianism." Or how about Freesks apparent counter to every argument. "That's a straw-man argument." Yup, it's futile.
@thefalconer Oh, btw, if you want an awesome article that pretty much sums up why arguing with a libertarian is futile, go to zompist.com/libertos.html. Great article there
@freesk8 Which libertarian positions do I oppose? How bout the one that wants to privatize public education? How about the one that wants to deregulate every industry? How about the one that wants to eliminate social security, well-fare, and pretty much any other government program designed to help the poor? Funny you didn't mention those.
@enderjsvl I'd like to privatize all the schools, and then give full-ride vouchers to the poor. That would provide better educational outcomes to the poor. Over time, the private sector could take over the funding of the vouchers... Libertarians are opposed to force and fraud from corporations. If they lie or force you to do something, then they should be held accountable. If their pollution harms someone, then they have to pay to clean it up. Social Security is about to collapse...
@freesk8 Unfortunately, I can't continue to argue with you on youtube. 500 characters is not near enough to make a conversation. I hate trying to sum things up into talking points. All I can say is that it should be obvious to a thinking person that libertarianism simply wouldn't work. The prisoner's dilemma is a nice little experiment that shows why unregulated business is self-imploding. Look it up.
@enderjsvl Feel free to give up. As for the Prisoners' Dilemma, that is a tragedy of the commons. But libertarians advocate privatizing most of the commons. This gets us out of the prisoners dilemma, at least for land and water pollution, plant, animal and mineral resources, and education. It only leaves air pollution as a tragedy of the commons prisoners dilemma problem for libertarians. For that, we tend to like tradeable pollution credits.
@freesk8 Well, as I said, I can't hold a conversation in 500 characters. Neither can you. I'd LOVE to hear how you claim privatizing the commons solves the prisoner's dilemma. Hell, I wasn't even really talking about that. I was talking about the less extreme implications of deregulation. Privatizing services would be even more dire. Yet again, in the hypothetical mind of the libertarian, privatization is the magical 1-size-fits-all fix. But I doubt you could explain it in 500 characters.
@enderjsvl In the commons, each person has an incentive to waste resources. This leads to the bad prisoners dilemma outcome of the destruction of the commons. If the commons is divided in to regions with private ownership, each owner now has the incentive to preserve the productive capacity of his or her share of the commons. The result is a natural environment that is not destroyed. 100 ch left!
@freesk8 Yeah, you didn't quite sell your case. You seem to be arguing that it's possible to split so-called commons into individual owned properties. Problem solved. Sadly, I'd say this is a ridiculous idea. There are thousands of examples of regulation and conditions that cannot be split in such a way. I mean, it's almost mind-boggling that you're even making this argument, since I had thought most libertarians abandoned it when they realize it was a hopeless position to defend.
@enderjsvl For fisheries, fishing rights in a quadrant of sea can be auctioned. This is done already. For grazing land, grazing rights can be auctioned or land sold to private ranchers. Name a commons other than the atmosphere that can NOT be privatized in this way with good effect?
@freesk8 Water for irrigation. The infrastructure the governs the internet. Forrests. Hell, even grazing land in your example doesn't work. The actions of one farmer on his so-called "owned" grazing land can indirectly affect a neighboring party. But again, simply pointing out where property rights work doesn't prove it ALWAYS works. Even some regulation companies like, like regulation on insider trading, falls victim to the prisoner's dilemma.
@enderjsvl Water rights are currently owned in much of the West. When run as a commons by the govt, more water tends to be wasted and the system costs more to run. The internet is run by a private non-profit. But there is no reason why competing non-profits would not work even better. Neighboring ranchers usually work out their own problems better than if the govt gets involved. I oppose insider trading laws. Insider trading provides info that markets need to price accurately.
@freesk8 Water rights are owned but HEAVILY regulated by the federal government. Colorado can only use so much of the Colorado river. Good thing, too, because I live in Nevada. You seriously think private organizations could handle water distribution with unregulated water rights? There's a reason diamonds are so valuable, and it ain't for lack of diamonds. It's because diamond miners know to keep them rare. Any good business man could use the same strat for water, to disastrous affect
@freesk8 Hell, Enron even knew so much about power. Remember the nineties? When California suddenly became raveled in an power shortage? Panic and mayhem and rising power costs? Turn out there was no power shortage. Plants were just taking more maintenance vacations. Those rising power costs were making a fortune for some of the traders at Enron. And that was only an attempt at deregulation. Yet libertarians still want to live in their hypothetical world where stuff like that doesn't...
@enderjsvl I think you're a bit confused in that you seem to think the prisoner's dilemma is equatable to the tragedy of the commons. But it's far more inclusive than that. Sure, tragedy of the commons is a type of prisoner's dilemma, but it could also be applied to road construction, insider trading regulation, health code standards, and many other non-common regulations that benefit ALL businesses. But if you want to narrow the focus on TotC, I guess we can go there.
@enderjsvl Welfare hurts the poor. It keeps them dependent and makes it take longer for them to get jobs. Private charities tend to do a better job of helping people get back on their feet. Reduce taxes so the economy can grow, so more wealth gets created, so more jobs are available and more money will be given to private charities by the people. Govt programs tend to hurt those they are trying to help. If not, why after the billions we have spent on poverty, is poverty growing?
@freesk8 When will you people just shut the fuck up with your libertarian nonsense that any reasonable, educated, person knows is nothing but mental masturbation? Seriously. Pack up your bags and get a flight to Somalia, where you can enjoy all the things you dream about.
@kaysandesses I love it when people have no rational response to my comments and only respond with insults and ad hominem attacks. It means that they have absolutely no rational response to my arguments.
You know that Somalia can't be a libertarian state because there is no defense of property rights there. So you have made a straw-man argument. And it is the same one that thefalconer made above. Silly statists. Government is like a religion to you.
@kaysandesses A straw-man argument is when you set up a flimsy version of your opponent's argument, just so that it will be easy for you to knock down. But since you only knocked down a flawed version of your opponent's argument, you never actually addressed your opponent's argument. Your straw-man argument is thus invalid. You held up Somalia as an example of libertarianism. But I showed you why it isn't. No social defense of property rights. QED.
@freesk8 No, a strawman argue is when one intentionally misrepresents another's argument. As a matter of fact, you used a strawman argument and don't even realize it.
@kaysandesses Yeah, that's what I said! I showed you how using Somalia was an example of a flawed version of libertarianism. You didn't even read my last post. :(
And exactly WHERE did I make a straw-man argument? Cut and paste a quote from me, if you can.
@freesk8 Oh, I read your last post and you still don't know what a strawman argument is. I didn't use a strawman because I never misrepresented your argument. It's really rather funny by incorrectly stating what a strawman argument is, and using that incorrect definition as a means to "prove" me wrong, you actually used a real strawman argument.
That's the problem with you Libertardians: you think you have all the answers when actually you have none. Use the Google.
@freesk8 I didn't imply any of the above. You know the old yarn about "assuming"? This time it makes an ass only of you. The fantasies you did note (i.e. welfare, "high" taxes, and government regulation) don't exist in Somalia. Therefore I suggested you move to Somalia where you won't be bothered with any of those.
You never mentioned defense of property rights in the post I initially responded to, and only brought that out after the fact.
@kaysandesses OK, well FYI, the essential elements of a libertarian society are where our equal, individual rights to life, liberty property and self defense are respected and defended by some social structure, whether governmental or non-governmental. There has never really been such a place in history, but all nations fall on a spectrum either closer or further from this ideal. The opposite end of the spectrum represents total dictatorship or pure socialism. The US is moving the wrong way.
@freesk8 Everything you just said is conjecture. I can name countless examples of individuals who were once on welfare, but got off it eventually. And I hardly doubt private charities could ever cover as much as welfare does. There was a study conducted showing most people greatly overestimate their charitable contributions. The "private organization does things better" mantra libertarians love has been shown to fail countless times. Read the article I posted. That sums it up nicely.
@enderjsvl I can show you studies that say when you extend jobless benefits, the avg. length of unemployment tends to go up. Govt taxation slows economic growth and wealth creation. This reduces the amount that indivs and corps have to give to charity. And what is more efficient, a govt bureaucracy or a private corp or charity? Private orgs are far more efficient on average. Show me a study that shows that govt depts are, on avg, more efficient than private orgs or corps. I'll read it.
@freesk8 The notion that private organization are more efficient than public is false. It's simple something that sounds true so people believe it. The fact is, there are somethings public institutions do better, and some things private institutions are better. Hell, I'm a mixed capitalism. I believe in capitalism because sometimes it IS the most efficient solution to a problem... but not always. Like most things, the is no one size fits all solutions, which is why i'm not a libertarian.
@enderjsvl Wow, on this we totally agree. I'm not an anarchist, as some libertarians are. I'm a minarchist. I believe in the minimum possible govt that is still effective at defending our equal, individual rights to life, liberty and property. Most of the time, this means leaving things to the free market. But wherever one person or corp is harming the interests (life, liberty, property) of another or committing fraud (lying) I am in favor of govt regs. So I agree with you! :)
@runningchance Care to document one example of a lie or deceit that Ron Paul has said? I want specifics. Otherwise, keep your ad hominem insults to yourself.
@freesk8 - Ron Paul supports terrorism, drug dealers and prostitutes. He is a trashy coward and a disgrace to America. Let us all say Amen. If you vote for Ron Paul you are wasting your vote. Romney 2012. Let us all say Amen.
Hello! The guy who put body scanners in our airports (michael chertoff) and the guy who stole $2.3 trillion from the Pentagon (dov zakheim) are 2 of Romney's advisors.
Hey!! I'm a Paulbot and you're a neocon!! Every body is a neocon. Constitution, Keynesian economics, neocon. End all wars, 9/11 was America's fault Iran can have nukes. Neocon, Ron Paul Ron Paul!!!
Ron Paul will save the world!!! Keynesian economics, neocon, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, neocon, Ron Pauuuuuu... drool..... mumble, mumble.
@runningchance Is this the best argument you can come up with? Name calling? It's not even an argument at all. You've only succeeded in making yourself look bad.
@runningchance Ron was the only one who uncovered Cain for what a banksters' shill he is; explained to people the causes of booms and busts; was the only person on panel who was warning about housing bubble as early as 2003 in Congress on record; was not bashing Obama or shouting repeal 'healthcare' and 'frank&dodd' like some broken record; exposed Greenspan; bashed Sarbanes-Oxley (a republican bill); acknowledged that the fault lies also with repubs and bush; end wars etc. A bozo, isn't he?
This populace, in all of its arrogance, self-righteousness, pity and entitlement, is shockingly baffled by the behavior of our leaders. Only the presentation of an idea matters to the sheep, most people in this country. The MERIT of an idea should be the ONLY CONSIDERATION.
I believe the Fed should go. Ron Paul believes this. I support him primarily by his consistency with this issue. And I'm the retard? See: Mirror.
@moestietabarnak No doubt it would be tough, but I'm willing to TRY life without a privately owned entity that issues the entirety of our currency. This country has tried the same thing over and over, vote a republican in, oh wait, he sucks. Vote in a democrat, oh wait, he sucks. Trying the same thing over and over? Insane. The Fed is way too powerful and unchecked. They need to go. And yes, a transition would be very difficult, try again.
@KadajXZ ok, spelling some for ya... a central bank to control currency availability is a good thing to manage the economy. as proof check Canada, our central bank is run by the government and the bank are under strict rules. result: we barely felt the monetary crisis, what we are feeling now is downturn in economy because the USA is hit hard, our main exportation...
What you need is not wipe the fed, it's to 1- nationalize it and 2- put it in the hand of economist not banker (with fool-guard)
@moestietabarnak Message length restrictions keep me from making a 10 page post. I agree, nationalization is what I advocate. Make congress call the shots, then through the elected reps, the people have a say. Nationalizing the Fed is, effectively, destroying it. I just cut out the middle man and say "Ok, start over."
@moestietabarnak A monetary system that's fiat with issuance of debt plus interest will always lead inevitably to one thing - inflation. The only way to avoid this is to grow the economy. The ONLY way America stayed afloat during The Fed era was its post WWII status, boy could our economy grow...
Having a system like this in a world with finite resources is absurd. We could do MUCH better. Things would need revamped though, like social programs and no more loans - all entirely possible.
@dennist3hmenace that's communism if you want a liberal socialistic paradise try the Netherlands. maybe one day someone will try and smuggle a dictionary into texas so you can learn the difference.
@menotyou48 I knew someone would try to "correct" me about communism vs socialism. They're too similar to separate, because they both feature the distinguishing factor of "state ownership" which is absolutely the case in North Korea, but not the Netherlands. The Netherlands has a capitalist free market economy.
At any rate, my only intent was to point out the lunacy of the comment I replied to. Anyone who says conservatives desire an anarchistic failed state is LYING, plain and simple.
@menotyou48 So according to you, deference to, and enforcement of the Constitution, ie, the rule of law, results in anarchy? I don't get it. Care to walk me through how obeying laws leads to anarchy?
@dennist3hmenace deference to the constitution means ignoring the 10th amendment to start a "war on drugs", suspending the 1st and 4th amendments to pursue a "war on terror" , ignoring the 5th 6th 7th and 8th amendments to arrest torture and hold people with out trial, you must have a very interesting dictionary if you think that is what "deference" means. But if you go and repeal all of the laws and regulations like every GOP candidate is trying to do right now then anarchy is what you get.
@menotyou48 I used the word correctly, and everything you said is true. Many problems we face today are due to the fact that rule of law is not being followed. That's why I support Ron Paul, who would end the war on drugs, bring the troops home, and respect state's rights.
@dennist3hmenace " Socialism and communism are ideological doctrines that have many similarities as well as many differences. It is difficult to discern the true differences between socialism and communism. "
One point that is frequently raised to distinguish socialism from communism is that socialism generally refers to an economic system, while communism generally refers to both an economic and a political system
@dennist3hmenace As an economic system, socialism seeks to manage the economy through deliberate and collective social control. Communism, however, seeks to manage both the economy and the society by ensuring that property is owned collectively, and that control over the distribution of property is centralized in order to achieve both classlessness and statelessness. Both socialism and communism are similar in that they seek to prevent the ill effects that are sometimes produced by capitalism.
@dennist3hmenace The difference between socialism and communism is that communists assert that both capitalism and private ownership of the means of production must be done away with as soon as possible in order to make sure a classless society, the communist ideal, is formed. Socialists, however, see capitalism as a possible part of the ideal state and believe that socialism can exist in a capitalist society.
@dennist3hmenace In fact, one of the ideas of socialism is that everyone within the society will benefit from capitalism as much as possible as long as the capitalism is controlled somehow by a centralized planning system.
@dennist3hmenace Another difference between socialism and communism is centered on who controls the structure of economy. Where socialism generally aims to have as many people as possible influence how the economy works, communism seeks to limit that number to a smaller group
That was just a cut paste thing right? They didn't truly think Sarbane-Oxley and Dodd Frank were put in place during the Obama administration.
Whether they believe it or it just a trick of editing, I think I'll have to go with the Obama this round. He may be everything they called him, but at least he isn't making it easier to corporations to lie, cheat, and steal.
@squidb8 really? Moral hazard in the economy is probably the largest it has ever been. The seeds may have been sown many years ago - but it has undeniably expanded under Obama stewardship.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
We can't figure out how to make things better, so let's just get rid of it. Let's repeal the Affordable Care Act because we don't find it politically satisfying, instead of taking strong action to hold corporate health care accountable. Let's strip millions of Americans of the right to fair treatment because we can't be caught in public saying otherwise.
Let's not try to make this country better. Make it less unified, more stratified.
This Video DOES NOT in "ANYWAY" sum up the value points of last night's debate.... This "IS" someone's DOCTORED version of how they "HOPE" you will perceive it went.
STOP!! - Don't be FORCED into submission by these RON PAUL SPOONERS, Left Winged agressors, or Right Winged agressors.
AMERICA "NEEDS" you more than "EVER" before to vote what "YOU" want. TAKE THE TIME, STUDY CANDIDATES... PLEASE!! America has never needed a more STUDIED group of voters than this election!
Rick Perry wasn't absolutely in horrible in debate last night but he still sucked. Mitt destroyed Rick Perry. All Perry talked about was Big Oil and Energy companies to every answer. He sounded like a uneducated spokesman for Exxon-Mobil. When asked about his economic and jobs plan he said he would get one to the public in three days. Dang Rick, not everyone wants to be a roustabout for oil companies like the illegals living in Texas. Put a fork in Rick, he is a loser just like Ron Paul.
The Republicans are always preaching conservatism and less government, but their rancid support of the growing police state is testament to the fact that they are neither for conservatism or the Constitution...Hopefully Paul will run as an Independent if he does not win nomination and I guarantee he will shock the world
If Ron Paul runs as an independent, we'll for certain get 0bama for four more years. I know you Paulies don't care but most Americans know that would be the end of America. That's why I believe the Paulie cult is nothing more than a sleazy tactic of 0bama and company. The cult members probably don't know it and I'm pretty sure even Ron Paul doesn't know it but it's obvious that 0bama has more to gain from it that anybody else.
@qpwillie ..yeah, we are the cult, not the demonic warmongering phony conservative dildos masquerading as traditional americans...traditional americans who want to support corporate cronyism and the destruction of the american way of life for middle class america....herman cain, mitt romney, and rick perry will all give the economy a short, temporary boost...then their policies will simply cause things to revert to where we are already headed.GOOD PLAN!Real change is needed,and that is Ron Paul
You don't need to tell me anything about what the Paulies believe. To you there are "liberals", "neocons" and Ron Paul - period.
Any group which follows ONE leader and believes he's infallible is a cult. You rudely filibuster every conversation you are aware of and claim your leader is the one and only salvation for America and the world.
Most people see you like a swarm of gnats who persistently annoy them while they're trying to converse about something sensible.
@qpwillie - Herman Cain made Ron Paul look like a complete moron in last nights debate with his answer about his past association with FED. Ron Paul and his goofy supporters will never end the FED. Giving money to the Ron Paul campaign is throwing your cash away. Voting for Ron Paul is wasting your vote. Romney will be nominee and possibly Cain as VP nominee. Both of these men understand class warfare and are preapproved by Wall St, FED, Banking and major Corps. Let us all say Amen.
@tempchannel1 - No he didn't, he made your silly Messiah Ron Paul look like a idiot so you now say Cain lied. Get a life and become a legitimate part of the GOP. This is class warfare and Ron Paul doesn't believe in waging war. Voting for Ron Paul is wasting your vote.
@qpwillie ..well if that is what most 'people' see then most people aren't even humans, they are media programmed slaves like yourself....so "I" fillibuster every conversationb.wow, i must have alot of time on my hands....Actually Ron Paul has the most divergent following of any politician out there...Young, old, conservative, independent.....A more accurate definition of a 'cult' would be people who get their talking ponts from any network news and fatboy frontman limbaugh...
@qpwillie ...no, it wouldn't!Now if you wil excuse me i have to do some work so i can support all you guys who have time to respond over and over again, repeating the same gibberish...It is funny that you think Paulians have the superiority complex when we are the ones who want to put the man in office who will help the most people.Ron Paul's voting record speaks for itself.Listen up or pay the price.The GOP establishment are only beholden to corporations, not people
@galarius - that is the problem with you ignorant Paulamites, whenever someone doesn't acknowledge dumb old Ron Paul as the "Savior" you say they aren't humans or they are enslaved by the media. You Paulamites are the same weirdos that believe in BigFoot. Grow up and support Mitt Romney. Romney understands global economics, banking and major corps. Less than 3% of the American people want Ron Paul. If you vote for Ron Paul, you are wasting your vote. Don't be a fool, vote Romney!
@runningchance .well, i don't agree.Mitt Romney understands corporations because he gives them oral for contributions.Seriously, Mitt Romney?the guy is as fake as it gets.Paul has a voting record that proves his commitment to conservatism.Any poll showing Paul and Obama going head to head is neck and neck, so 3% is a fabrication.Ignoring his strong poll numbers doesn't help your argument.Paul will get more independent and young voters than any of those other twits, which is needed to win.
@galarius - No Sir, Ron Paul has no chance at all against Obama. Obama would win by a landslide. You are being manipulated. Ron Paul can't even defeat Bachmann who is next to last in legitimate GOP polls. Stop the foolishness and become a good standing voter for the traditional GOP. There are no evil forces or conspiracies against Ron Paul, the fact is only about 3% of the USA voters support him.
@runningchance Well that's all false of course since he's polling in third place right now. A vote for Romney is a wasted vote since he cannot beat Obama. Ron Paul and his solid 10% support will not endorse or vote for Romney if he becomes the nominee, which means Romney will be just as useless as McCain against Obama. Your choice is clear, Ron Paul or Obama.
@ditkuss - that is ridiculous and people like you Paulamites will be to blame for what goes wrong in the USA. If you think for one second that Ron Paul could defeat Obama you are crazier than Ron Paul himself. There are no conspiracies against Ron Paul, I say legitimate polls have him at 3% support from registered voters and you say he is 10% of the GOP. Even if Paul somehow managed to finish 3rd, which won't happen, Romney will be the GOP nominee. Now grow up and shut up with the foolishness.
@runningchance So you're choosing Obama to be our next president. Romney cannot win the Presidency without the 10% of the GOP that supports Ron Paul and will never endorse Romney. I'm trying to get this through your greazy head but you're being incredibly angry and stubborn on this point. Obama it is then I guess.
@ditkuss - Ron Paul is not a legitimate candidate and doesn't uphold to traditional values of the GOP. Ron Paul will not be the nominee. I refuse to even entertain the thought of Ron Paul ever being the Republican Nominee. Ron Paul is a trouble maker that would do more damage to the USA than Obama and Bush put together. Ron Paul's attacks against the FED are unacceptable and would make the USA a 3rd world country. His rhetoric is fun to listen to but the reality is that he's not fit as a leader.
@ditkuss - that is my entire point, you Paulamite cult members would rather sacrifice our banking system, FED, major corps, and wall st than to use your vote wisely. Voting for Ron Paul is wasting your vote. He is a joke and nobody likes him or his goofy way of thinking.
@ditkuss So you honestly think that this fabled 10% (which in reality is single digits) will be enough to nominate Ronster and be able to garner enough support to beat Obama in the general election? The moderates have decided every general election in this country for decades. They will do so again in 2012. The only GOP candidate who has a real shot at attracting those moderates is Huntsman and the GOP Masters have already decided Romney is their man.
@runningchance ...you can keep repeating meaningless words all day long, no one else is listening except all the other foxnews/limbaugh slaves..and you guys are getting smaller in number by the day.Paul has been in Congress for how long now?I guess that is because he isn't a politician wwhose ideas aren't taken seriously by those who get a chance to listen to him.And that is your whole goal, to stop people from listening.Too bad the military doesn' agree, Ron paul is their choice.Take that
@qpwillie - The Paulamites are truly a cult and explaining to them to be logical is out of the question. I seriously doubt that Ron Paul will have the financing to run as a independent. He only has a backing of about 3% but that 3% could actually give Obama victory if the Paulamites wasted their votes on Ron Paul. At this point I believe Ron Paul will drop out and just keep his mouth shut.
@qpwillie - arguing with them does no good, they are blind to common sense. If Obama is re-elected, the Paulamites only have themselves to blame. They are truly a cult. If you talk to any of them, they actually believe that Ron Paul is going to be President of the USA. He is last and after his poor performance last night he just needs to drop out and tell his supporters to go with whoever wins the GOP nomination but the Paulamites are poor losers and think everything is a conspiracy.
Of course you're right about not arguing with them. I doubt even a trained professional could deprogram them.
If, or more accurately WHEN Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination, they don't care if 0bama is reelected. They don't see any difference between 0bama and anybody else who isn't Ron Paul. So yes, it's a cult in the truest sense of the term.
@qpwillie - they think everything is a conspiracy against Ron Paul, they don't understand that Obama is using them as tools to his victory. Could you actually see Ron Paul in a one on one Presidential debate against Obama? It is just a reality that Obama would destroy him. I know the Paulamites believe that Ron Paul would win but the other 97% of the USA believes Ron Paul is a nut. Of course that is just fiction because Ron Paul doesn't deserve and will never be the GOP Nominee.
The GOP establishment is AMAZING.They only have one canidate that people are actually fired up about, and that is PAUL.But their addiction to war and corporate proliferation is going to cause them to nominate another phony conservative who will do absolutely NOTHING to correct the fundamental issues of job outsourcing and the continued decline of the American way of life..
The government needs to get off the backs of the businesses.That is why capitalism is failing,because there's a ton of socialist garbage on it's back! 92% of all failed economies in the US, are presided over by democrats. The useful idiots who vote democrat, need to do research that's at least a little more involved than hearing what the creeps in the media tell them. Who defended slavery? Who had EVERY segregationist on their rolls?Who came up with the federal tax and social security scams?WHO?
This has been flagged as spam show
Dodd-Frank clearly stares ... "Banks can no longer be Bailed-Out"
So if you want to repeal Dodd-Frank then you are for future Bank Bail-Outs!!
We are not stupid!!!
m530bc 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Watch the secrets of "Republican Debate" at --> freemovie-online(dot)com
ibuelizar12 1 month ago
999 or 666???????????????
bonjovihair 3 months ago
When I hear the words "...repeal capital gains tax" - And I do, all the time, and always from Republicans - my blood literally boils. How can a party be saying this and nobody can see right through their corrupt intentions?
bamcis17 3 months ago
nigggggggggaas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thomaspegful 3 months ago
oh boyy!!!!!!! the party of NO!!!! the party who looks after only their self interest and not other peoples. ohh boyy!!! lets continue to bankrupt our country by lowering taxes for the rich, continue the quagmire in iraq, eleminate social programs for education, parks and recreation, disabled familiies, stem cell reseach, space exploration projects, and let everyone die who cant afford health insurance. BECASE like cain said, IF YOURE NOT RICH YOU'RE THE ONE TO BLAME GOD I HATE THAT ASSHOLE.
Reasonwillprevail14 4 months ago
Suits & Ties Experts one and all blah blah blah on YT & TV, Got it all figured out dump more money on the wealthy, Suits crushing the people to bailout out their mess, Experts one and all at O.P.M. Chess, Blue tie you feel good Red tie your scared to shit, Blah blah blah just keep sucking corporate tit, Media suits, Government suits representing who and what, Those who wear suits while kicking your butt, With O.ther P.eoples M.oney & Global Chess, Suits addicted to their O.P.M. Mess.
PeaceProfit 4 months ago
One*Demand My*1040 + Control the funding & YOU+The*People Control Development & Corporations MUST LOBBY YOU+The*People One*Demand My*1040 Individual Directed Capitalization + iDC 65% of Your tax contribution directed & spent in the areas of public funding of YOUR CHOICE Power+2+The*Peaceful +My*1040+ Tea Party, Coffee Party, Any Party = The 99% DIVIDED-WE-FAIL Seize the Moral High Ground Unite the C.H.A.O.S. The Opportunity is N.O.W. Demand My*1040 Recovery Security Unity will Rapidly Develop
PeaceProfit 4 months ago
And this is at a time when the top 1% already owns 43% of all financial wealth in America.
And the bottom 80% owns just 7% . . .
And Cain wants to skew things even further in favor of the rich?!?
Senehtsotara 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
An independent analysis of Herman Cain's tax plan by The Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington think tank, said it would increase taxes on 84% of U.S. households, hitting low- and medium-income households the hardest. The analysis said that households making $10,000 to $20,000 would see whopping tax increases averaging $2,705 -- an increase of nearly 950%!
Senehtsotara 4 months ago
So what, leftists are for more status quo!?
USA4July1776 4 months ago
i love john huntsman, im a democrat, but huntsman is a brilliant and experienced guy. Perry, Romney, Bachman, The guy from Pennsylvania, and Gingrich are by the very definition of the word, frightening.
pacoforlunch6 4 months ago
Obama ran on the slogan "yes we can." Every one of these guys are running on the slogan "no you can't."
parthenocarpySA 4 months ago
This video takes the debate out of context. For instance; Ron Paul talks about repealing "Sarbanes–Oxley", which was a failure enacted by the REPUBLICANS! In that part of the debate Ron Paul was telling the others that they have to look at the mistakes the Republican party has made as well, and not just criticize the Democratic policies.
kylio27 4 months ago 5
Repeal DOMA
Shahamu 4 months ago
OBAMA 2012
ginofrater 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sluggish economy, high unemployment and we are in deep debts.
Hussein Obama has to go. Simple as that.
TangTuyetMinh 4 months ago
And unsurprisingly John Huntsman makes the only halfway rational comment in that clip.
guitargod98 4 months ago
No! NO! NO! NO! Thats all the republicans say.
cchris000043 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Forget about Ron Paul. He is a lost cause and has no chance to be GOP Nominee. Ron Paul is dead last in the major polls and usually not even mentioned. You Paulamite cult members are a bunch of weirdos. Anyone who votes for Ron Paul is wasting their vote. Let us all say Amen.
runningchance 4 months ago
A wall of text occurs when many keys are pressed in sequence and posted to a webpage. The many resulting words are then visible to other viewers for the foreseeable future. However, because there are so many words it is unlikely that the average viewer will read any of them. Likely they will merely skip over the text entirely, thereby ignoring the wall. For this and other reasons, a wall of text will rarely be voted up and will probably never be the top comment. Good thing there is a character l
Dokugo 4 months ago 13
Huntsman made a logical, rational statement. In response, they all looked at him like he's crazy. Santorum was almost there. He said we need to repeal all of them, and replace some. Which I guess would be like never repealing them in the first place.
particle409 4 months ago
Repeal Sarbanes Oxley?!?! Are they crazy!?!?!?
NursingHomeHotties 4 months ago
Repeal repeal repeal repeal. Do they have an original idea in their skulls?
FDASARO 4 months ago
Responsible citizens pick up after themselves? Right, like Bush or Nixon did! ha!
aesteban 4 months ago
@aesteban Oh snap!
rollinmitchell1 4 months ago
Ok.. so do I thumbs up cuz it's a good video or thumbs down because I hate the content?.. maybe I should repeal it! yea that's it.. lol
Bi99aDK 4 months ago
Geez. Why actually watch the whole debate when you can just get quick, context free, easily misinterpreted soundbites? This is why the political discourse has such an attention deficit disorder.
LuisCamachoIII 4 months ago
LOL, repeal the police & military & fire department, and repeal ourselves! Repeal it ALL!!! LOL ( I hope they know it's not that easy)
yadig2012 4 months ago
yeah Repeal everything and take this country back to the dark ages, and take away any chanced of finding out how many of the GOP reps on this panel alone gained from the TARP funds not to mention the bad loans they invested in personally to sell overseas through these very banks AND the TARP money their wives took for their own personal businesses (or husbands, ahem, bachmann clinic perhaps?)
the1tigglet 5 months ago 2
All want to repeal, all BUT Dr. Paul want to replace what they repeal with something else.
whb99 5 months ago
Whatever you losers say, one of these guys is the next president. 0bama is on his way out. Deal with it.
Chip53 5 months ago
This doesn't even look into the truth of the debate. All of the candidates BESIDES Ron Paul are your typical statists who lie through their teeth..
You want things to change? You want an honest man who ACTUALLY stands by what he says? Google RON PAUL.
and for anyone who doesn't know.. Ron Paul is NOT a Republican. He is a LIBERTARIAN. He is for your FREEDOM.
Please don't be ignorant. Watch the WHOLE debate. Google Ron Paul. Google Libertarian and Freedom.. and See for yourself.
itsafunthing2do 5 months ago
@itsafunthing2do Meh. The guy wants to return to the gold standard and he's a libertarian. This is the sign of an unserious and fundamentally flawed candidate. That being said, he's still the best they have...other than....say, some random guy they could have picked out of the audience.
thefalconer 5 months ago
@thefalconer So you prefer fiat currency... money based on nothing? Money based on debt? Money that loses value over time? That lost value is a tax on the poor.
And what, specifically, is wrong about being a libertarian? Is it the military non-interventionism? The opposition to the drug war and the PATRIOT Act? Or do you oppose the libertarian defense of marriage equality or free speech? Just which libertarian positions do you oppose?
freesk8 5 months ago
@freesk8 There isn't enough gold on earth to back up the USD that exists, which is part of the reason that it became unworkable in the first place.
For all the flaws of libertarianism, just check out any country that has zero government (ie: Congo, Somalia). Think about the actual implementation of this ridiculous ideology, rather than the supposedly utopian dream.
thefalconer 5 months ago
@thefalconer With fractional reserve banking, we also have not enough value in banks to back up all the currency we have. So why is a gold standard worse? Only a fraction of the people will ever demand gold for their paper. But making such exchange possible give the paper real value.
The Congo is not a libertarian state. Neither is the Somalia. A libertarian state would have some defense of property rights, whether governmental or not. You've made a straw-man argument.
freesk8 5 months ago
@freesk8 I never said either was a "libertarian state", which only exists in the minds of libertarians-so really there is no functioning model. It's an exercise of arguing practical realities (ie: anarchal states) vs. your utopia (whatever you imagine is libertarian mecca). I said that neither of those states has a government - they are the reality of removing a government from a state. Anarchy. Of course, this doesn't happen in the mythical world libertarians imagine.
thefalconer 5 months ago
@thefalconer Some libertarians are anarchists, some are minarchists.
But my original point was that a gold standard is better than the fiat currency we have, and that you have yet to point out a libertarian policy that you disagree with. All you can do is call us names and make straw-man arguments. Ah, well.
freesk8 5 months ago
@freesk8
He is clearly clueless by his comments.
rmccay88 5 months ago
@thefalconer Give it up, man. Arguing with a libertarian is futile. They live in hypothetical world that allows them to move the goal posts whenever the arguments not going their way. Point to a failed examples of libertarian policies in other countries, they'll just say "that's not true libertarianism." Or "you just don't understand libertarianism." Or how about Freesks apparent counter to every argument. "That's a straw-man argument." Yup, it's futile.
enderjsvl 5 months ago
@thefalconer Oh, btw, if you want an awesome article that pretty much sums up why arguing with a libertarian is futile, go to zompist.com/libertos.html. Great article there
enderjsvl 5 months ago
@freesk8 Which libertarian positions do I oppose? How bout the one that wants to privatize public education? How about the one that wants to deregulate every industry? How about the one that wants to eliminate social security, well-fare, and pretty much any other government program designed to help the poor? Funny you didn't mention those.
enderjsvl 5 months ago
@enderjsvl I'd like to privatize all the schools, and then give full-ride vouchers to the poor. That would provide better educational outcomes to the poor. Over time, the private sector could take over the funding of the vouchers... Libertarians are opposed to force and fraud from corporations. If they lie or force you to do something, then they should be held accountable. If their pollution harms someone, then they have to pay to clean it up. Social Security is about to collapse...
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 Unfortunately, I can't continue to argue with you on youtube. 500 characters is not near enough to make a conversation. I hate trying to sum things up into talking points. All I can say is that it should be obvious to a thinking person that libertarianism simply wouldn't work. The prisoner's dilemma is a nice little experiment that shows why unregulated business is self-imploding. Look it up.
enderjsvl 4 months ago
@enderjsvl Feel free to give up. As for the Prisoners' Dilemma, that is a tragedy of the commons. But libertarians advocate privatizing most of the commons. This gets us out of the prisoners dilemma, at least for land and water pollution, plant, animal and mineral resources, and education. It only leaves air pollution as a tragedy of the commons prisoners dilemma problem for libertarians. For that, we tend to like tradeable pollution credits.
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 Well, as I said, I can't hold a conversation in 500 characters. Neither can you. I'd LOVE to hear how you claim privatizing the commons solves the prisoner's dilemma. Hell, I wasn't even really talking about that. I was talking about the less extreme implications of deregulation. Privatizing services would be even more dire. Yet again, in the hypothetical mind of the libertarian, privatization is the magical 1-size-fits-all fix. But I doubt you could explain it in 500 characters.
enderjsvl 4 months ago
@enderjsvl In the commons, each person has an incentive to waste resources. This leads to the bad prisoners dilemma outcome of the destruction of the commons. If the commons is divided in to regions with private ownership, each owner now has the incentive to preserve the productive capacity of his or her share of the commons. The result is a natural environment that is not destroyed. 100 ch left!
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 Yeah, you didn't quite sell your case. You seem to be arguing that it's possible to split so-called commons into individual owned properties. Problem solved. Sadly, I'd say this is a ridiculous idea. There are thousands of examples of regulation and conditions that cannot be split in such a way. I mean, it's almost mind-boggling that you're even making this argument, since I had thought most libertarians abandoned it when they realize it was a hopeless position to defend.
enderjsvl 4 months ago
@enderjsvl For fisheries, fishing rights in a quadrant of sea can be auctioned. This is done already. For grazing land, grazing rights can be auctioned or land sold to private ranchers. Name a commons other than the atmosphere that can NOT be privatized in this way with good effect?
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 Water for irrigation. The infrastructure the governs the internet. Forrests. Hell, even grazing land in your example doesn't work. The actions of one farmer on his so-called "owned" grazing land can indirectly affect a neighboring party. But again, simply pointing out where property rights work doesn't prove it ALWAYS works. Even some regulation companies like, like regulation on insider trading, falls victim to the prisoner's dilemma.
enderjsvl 4 months ago
@enderjsvl Water rights are currently owned in much of the West. When run as a commons by the govt, more water tends to be wasted and the system costs more to run. The internet is run by a private non-profit. But there is no reason why competing non-profits would not work even better. Neighboring ranchers usually work out their own problems better than if the govt gets involved. I oppose insider trading laws. Insider trading provides info that markets need to price accurately.
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 Water rights are owned but HEAVILY regulated by the federal government. Colorado can only use so much of the Colorado river. Good thing, too, because I live in Nevada. You seriously think private organizations could handle water distribution with unregulated water rights? There's a reason diamonds are so valuable, and it ain't for lack of diamonds. It's because diamond miners know to keep them rare. Any good business man could use the same strat for water, to disastrous affect
enderjsvl 4 months ago
@freesk8 Hell, Enron even knew so much about power. Remember the nineties? When California suddenly became raveled in an power shortage? Panic and mayhem and rising power costs? Turn out there was no power shortage. Plants were just taking more maintenance vacations. Those rising power costs were making a fortune for some of the traders at Enron. And that was only an attempt at deregulation. Yet libertarians still want to live in their hypothetical world where stuff like that doesn't...
enderjsvl 4 months ago
@enderjsvl I think you're a bit confused in that you seem to think the prisoner's dilemma is equatable to the tragedy of the commons. But it's far more inclusive than that. Sure, tragedy of the commons is a type of prisoner's dilemma, but it could also be applied to road construction, insider trading regulation, health code standards, and many other non-common regulations that benefit ALL businesses. But if you want to narrow the focus on TotC, I guess we can go there.
enderjsvl 4 months ago
@enderjsvl Welfare hurts the poor. It keeps them dependent and makes it take longer for them to get jobs. Private charities tend to do a better job of helping people get back on their feet. Reduce taxes so the economy can grow, so more wealth gets created, so more jobs are available and more money will be given to private charities by the people. Govt programs tend to hurt those they are trying to help. If not, why after the billions we have spent on poverty, is poverty growing?
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 When will you people just shut the fuck up with your libertarian nonsense that any reasonable, educated, person knows is nothing but mental masturbation? Seriously. Pack up your bags and get a flight to Somalia, where you can enjoy all the things you dream about.
kaysandesses 4 months ago
@kaysandesses I love it when people have no rational response to my comments and only respond with insults and ad hominem attacks. It means that they have absolutely no rational response to my arguments.
You know that Somalia can't be a libertarian state because there is no defense of property rights there. So you have made a straw-man argument. And it is the same one that thefalconer made above. Silly statists. Government is like a religion to you.
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 Why do you think your irrational posts merit a rational response?
Look up the definition of "straw-man argument", because it's apparent you don't know what it really means.
kaysandesses 4 months ago
@kaysandesses A straw-man argument is when you set up a flimsy version of your opponent's argument, just so that it will be easy for you to knock down. But since you only knocked down a flawed version of your opponent's argument, you never actually addressed your opponent's argument. Your straw-man argument is thus invalid. You held up Somalia as an example of libertarianism. But I showed you why it isn't. No social defense of property rights. QED.
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 No, a strawman argue is when one intentionally misrepresents another's argument. As a matter of fact, you used a strawman argument and don't even realize it.
kaysandesses 4 months ago
@kaysandesses Yeah, that's what I said! I showed you how using Somalia was an example of a flawed version of libertarianism. You didn't even read my last post. :(
And exactly WHERE did I make a straw-man argument? Cut and paste a quote from me, if you can.
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 Oh, I read your last post and you still don't know what a strawman argument is. I didn't use a strawman because I never misrepresented your argument. It's really rather funny by incorrectly stating what a strawman argument is, and using that incorrect definition as a means to "prove" me wrong, you actually used a real strawman argument.
That's the problem with you Libertardians: you think you have all the answers when actually you have none. Use the Google.
kaysandesses 4 months ago
@kaysandesses OK, it seems to me that when you used Somalia as an example of Libertarianism, you misrepresented the argument for Libertarianism.
Here was the implied logical structure of your argument:
1) Somalia is an example of the ideal libertarian society
"Pack up your bags and get a flight to Somalia, where you can enjoy all the things you dream about."
2) Somalia clearly sucks
3) Therefore libertarianism sucks
Your arg falls apart because Somalia has no social defense of property rights.
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 I didn't imply any of the above. You know the old yarn about "assuming"? This time it makes an ass only of you. The fantasies you did note (i.e. welfare, "high" taxes, and government regulation) don't exist in Somalia. Therefore I suggested you move to Somalia where you won't be bothered with any of those.
You never mentioned defense of property rights in the post I initially responded to, and only brought that out after the fact.
kaysandesses 4 months ago
@kaysandesses OK, well FYI, the essential elements of a libertarian society are where our equal, individual rights to life, liberty property and self defense are respected and defended by some social structure, whether governmental or non-governmental. There has never really been such a place in history, but all nations fall on a spectrum either closer or further from this ideal. The opposite end of the spectrum represents total dictatorship or pure socialism. The US is moving the wrong way.
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 Everything you just said is conjecture. I can name countless examples of individuals who were once on welfare, but got off it eventually. And I hardly doubt private charities could ever cover as much as welfare does. There was a study conducted showing most people greatly overestimate their charitable contributions. The "private organization does things better" mantra libertarians love has been shown to fail countless times. Read the article I posted. That sums it up nicely.
enderjsvl 4 months ago
@enderjsvl I can show you studies that say when you extend jobless benefits, the avg. length of unemployment tends to go up. Govt taxation slows economic growth and wealth creation. This reduces the amount that indivs and corps have to give to charity. And what is more efficient, a govt bureaucracy or a private corp or charity? Private orgs are far more efficient on average. Show me a study that shows that govt depts are, on avg, more efficient than private orgs or corps. I'll read it.
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 The notion that private organization are more efficient than public is false. It's simple something that sounds true so people believe it. The fact is, there are somethings public institutions do better, and some things private institutions are better. Hell, I'm a mixed capitalism. I believe in capitalism because sometimes it IS the most efficient solution to a problem... but not always. Like most things, the is no one size fits all solutions, which is why i'm not a libertarian.
enderjsvl 4 months ago
@enderjsvl Wow, on this we totally agree. I'm not an anarchist, as some libertarians are. I'm a minarchist. I believe in the minimum possible govt that is still effective at defending our equal, individual rights to life, liberty and property. Most of the time, this means leaving things to the free market. But wherever one person or corp is harming the interests (life, liberty, property) of another or committing fraud (lying) I am in favor of govt regs. So I agree with you! :)
freesk8 4 months ago
@freesk8 Wow, kinda butchered my last post. Guess that's why I should reread before I hit the post button. :-)
enderjsvl 4 months ago
@itsafunthing2do - Ron Paul is the Queen of Lies and Deceit. Voting for Ron Paul is wasting your vote.
runningchance 4 months ago
@runningchance he's actually the only candidate that doesn't go back on what he says... do you have any proof that he's a liar and deceiver?
mredwards0915 4 months ago
@runningchance Care to document one example of a lie or deceit that Ron Paul has said? I want specifics. Otherwise, keep your ad hominem insults to yourself.
freesk8 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@freesk8 - Ron Paul supports terrorism, drug dealers and prostitutes. He is a trashy coward and a disgrace to America. Let us all say Amen. If you vote for Ron Paul you are wasting your vote. Romney 2012. Let us all say Amen.
runningchance 4 months ago
Hello! The guy who put body scanners in our airports (michael chertoff) and the guy who stole $2.3 trillion from the Pentagon (dov zakheim) are 2 of Romney's advisors.
HELLO! ANYBODY HOME?
maplespak 5 months ago
Ron Paul looked and talked like a complete bozo last night. Only retards support Ron Paul.
runningchance 5 months ago
@runningchance
Hey!! I'm a Paulbot and you're a neocon!! Every body is a neocon. Constitution, Keynesian economics, neocon. End all wars, 9/11 was America's fault Iran can have nukes. Neocon, Ron Paul Ron Paul!!!
Ron Paul will save the world!!! Keynesian economics, neocon, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, neocon, Ron Pauuuuuu... drool..... mumble, mumble.
qpwillie 5 months ago
@qpwillie - NeoCons shall rule again! Did somebody say Amen?
runningchance 4 months ago
@runningchance Is this the best argument you can come up with? Name calling? It's not even an argument at all. You've only succeeded in making yourself look bad.
dennist3hmenace 5 months ago
@runningchance Ron was the only one who uncovered Cain for what a banksters' shill he is; explained to people the causes of booms and busts; was the only person on panel who was warning about housing bubble as early as 2003 in Congress on record; was not bashing Obama or shouting repeal 'healthcare' and 'frank&dodd' like some broken record; exposed Greenspan; bashed Sarbanes-Oxley (a republican bill); acknowledged that the fault lies also with repubs and bush; end wars etc. A bozo, isn't he?
BossyBadger 4 months ago
@runningchance rip gold :(
jvemPiRe14 4 months ago
@runningchance #1 thing wrong with this country.
This populace, in all of its arrogance, self-righteousness, pity and entitlement, is shockingly baffled by the behavior of our leaders. Only the presentation of an idea matters to the sheep, most people in this country. The MERIT of an idea should be the ONLY CONSIDERATION.
I believe the Fed should go. Ron Paul believes this. I support him primarily by his consistency with this issue. And I'm the retard? See: Mirror.
KadajXZ 4 months ago
@KadajXZ yep you are.. too basic an idea, you need to think it through all the consequence, too hard for some..
moestietabarnak 4 months ago in playlist h
@moestietabarnak No doubt it would be tough, but I'm willing to TRY life without a privately owned entity that issues the entirety of our currency. This country has tried the same thing over and over, vote a republican in, oh wait, he sucks. Vote in a democrat, oh wait, he sucks. Trying the same thing over and over? Insane. The Fed is way too powerful and unchecked. They need to go. And yes, a transition would be very difficult, try again.
KadajXZ 4 months ago
@KadajXZ ok, spelling some for ya... a central bank to control currency availability is a good thing to manage the economy. as proof check Canada, our central bank is run by the government and the bank are under strict rules. result: we barely felt the monetary crisis, what we are feeling now is downturn in economy because the USA is hit hard, our main exportation...
What you need is not wipe the fed, it's to 1- nationalize it and 2- put it in the hand of economist not banker (with fool-guard)
moestietabarnak 4 months ago
@moestietabarnak Message length restrictions keep me from making a 10 page post. I agree, nationalization is what I advocate. Make congress call the shots, then through the elected reps, the people have a say. Nationalizing the Fed is, effectively, destroying it. I just cut out the middle man and say "Ok, start over."
KadajXZ 4 months ago
@moestietabarnak A monetary system that's fiat with issuance of debt plus interest will always lead inevitably to one thing - inflation. The only way to avoid this is to grow the economy. The ONLY way America stayed afloat during The Fed era was its post WWII status, boy could our economy grow...
Having a system like this in a world with finite resources is absurd. We could do MUCH better. Things would need revamped though, like social programs and no more loans - all entirely possible.
KadajXZ 4 months ago
sad state of affairs
meggafish 5 months ago
Want dont they just move to Somalia it is conservatives paradise. There no laws or regulations.
wowamonn 5 months ago
@wowamonn By the same non-logic, North Korea would be liberal paradise. Socialistic government that runs everything.
dennist3hmenace 5 months ago
@dennist3hmenace that's communism if you want a liberal socialistic paradise try the Netherlands. maybe one day someone will try and smuggle a dictionary into texas so you can learn the difference.
menotyou48 5 months ago
@menotyou48 I knew someone would try to "correct" me about communism vs socialism. They're too similar to separate, because they both feature the distinguishing factor of "state ownership" which is absolutely the case in North Korea, but not the Netherlands. The Netherlands has a capitalist free market economy.
At any rate, my only intent was to point out the lunacy of the comment I replied to. Anyone who says conservatives desire an anarchistic failed state is LYING, plain and simple.
dennist3hmenace 5 months ago
@dennist3hmenace may not be what they want but it will be what they get
menotyou48 5 months ago
@menotyou48 So according to you, deference to, and enforcement of the Constitution, ie, the rule of law, results in anarchy? I don't get it. Care to walk me through how obeying laws leads to anarchy?
dennist3hmenace 5 months ago
@dennist3hmenace deference to the constitution means ignoring the 10th amendment to start a "war on drugs", suspending the 1st and 4th amendments to pursue a "war on terror" , ignoring the 5th 6th 7th and 8th amendments to arrest torture and hold people with out trial, you must have a very interesting dictionary if you think that is what "deference" means. But if you go and repeal all of the laws and regulations like every GOP candidate is trying to do right now then anarchy is what you get.
menotyou48 5 months ago
@menotyou48 I used the word correctly, and everything you said is true. Many problems we face today are due to the fact that rule of law is not being followed. That's why I support Ron Paul, who would end the war on drugs, bring the troops home, and respect state's rights.
dennist3hmenace 5 months ago
@dennist3hmenace " Socialism and communism are ideological doctrines that have many similarities as well as many differences. It is difficult to discern the true differences between socialism and communism. "
One point that is frequently raised to distinguish socialism from communism is that socialism generally refers to an economic system, while communism generally refers to both an economic and a political system
wowamonn 4 months ago
@dennist3hmenace As an economic system, socialism seeks to manage the economy through deliberate and collective social control. Communism, however, seeks to manage both the economy and the society by ensuring that property is owned collectively, and that control over the distribution of property is centralized in order to achieve both classlessness and statelessness. Both socialism and communism are similar in that they seek to prevent the ill effects that are sometimes produced by capitalism.
wowamonn 4 months ago
@dennist3hmenace The difference between socialism and communism is that communists assert that both capitalism and private ownership of the means of production must be done away with as soon as possible in order to make sure a classless society, the communist ideal, is formed. Socialists, however, see capitalism as a possible part of the ideal state and believe that socialism can exist in a capitalist society.
wowamonn 4 months ago
@dennist3hmenace In fact, one of the ideas of socialism is that everyone within the society will benefit from capitalism as much as possible as long as the capitalism is controlled somehow by a centralized planning system.
wowamonn 4 months ago
@dennist3hmenace Another difference between socialism and communism is centered on who controls the structure of economy. Where socialism generally aims to have as many people as possible influence how the economy works, communism seeks to limit that number to a smaller group
wowamonn 4 months ago
Keep everything! 'Cause IF we do, world's a unicorn paradise, B4 1 stabs u 2death.
To which:
-liberals rant: let's mandate unicorn horn-tip protector!
-neoKUNTs rant: let's invade Land of Unicorns!
-BOTH party chairs rant: offer 'em public-stables contingent on mandating Merck's infertility vaccine, u know for CommonGood.
neoKUNTS feel good 'cause they killed something, today.
liberals feel good 'cause they used gvt to control something to FEEL good, & that they did... well anything that day.
RosenKrantz666 5 months ago
Way too short to be even remotely meaningful
CanticlesInProgress 5 months ago in playlist Dartmouth GOP economy debate
does anyone else think that hunstman is the only republican with half a brain cell?
caddy38 5 months ago 28
This has been flagged as spam show
@caddy38 Yep and that's why he has no chance of winning the nomination.
CalexanderJ 5 months ago
@caddy38 Yes.
RainCityBlues 5 months ago
@caddy38 ok, id still never vote for him but at least he isn't batshit insane like the other ones
caddy38 5 months ago
Yeah, that's the answer. No regulations. That's gonna work.
BottleConcreteBlond 5 months ago
DORKS in the round!!
Charlie looks great tho!
RealityBallet 5 months ago in playlist Dartmouth GOP economy debate
That was just a cut paste thing right? They didn't truly think Sarbane-Oxley and Dodd Frank were put in place during the Obama administration.
Whether they believe it or it just a trick of editing, I think I'll have to go with the Obama this round. He may be everything they called him, but at least he isn't making it easier to corporations to lie, cheat, and steal.
squidb8 5 months ago
@squidb8 really? Moral hazard in the economy is probably the largest it has ever been. The seeds may have been sown many years ago - but it has undeniably expanded under Obama stewardship.
2plus2make4 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 5 months ago
Repeal it.
Is that really their answer to everything?
We can't figure out how to make things better, so let's just get rid of it. Let's repeal the Affordable Care Act because we don't find it politically satisfying, instead of taking strong action to hold corporate health care accountable. Let's strip millions of Americans of the right to fair treatment because we can't be caught in public saying otherwise.
Let's not try to make this country better. Make it less unified, more stratified.
Ematched 5 months ago
Repeal all the things!
sugarfreelemonade 5 months ago
Ron Paul foresaw and warned about this crisis as early as 2003... he is the only one, Republican or Democrat who understands economics... full stop.
Ron Paul 2012
Andronichuk 5 months ago in playlist Dartmouth GOP economy debate
This Video DOES NOT in "ANYWAY" sum up the value points of last night's debate.... This "IS" someone's DOCTORED version of how they "HOPE" you will perceive it went.
STOP!! - Don't be FORCED into submission by these RON PAUL SPOONERS, Left Winged agressors, or Right Winged agressors.
AMERICA "NEEDS" you more than "EVER" before to vote what "YOU" want. TAKE THE TIME, STUDY CANDIDATES... PLEASE!! America has never needed a more STUDIED group of voters than this election!
VOTE FOR "YOU!"
BONZAII42 5 months ago in playlist Dartmouth GOP economy debate
@BONZAII42
lolwut
Parabol0086 5 months ago
@Parabol0086 - if I have to explain it, its already too late to even try.. :)
BONZAII42 5 months ago
Rick Perry wasn't absolutely in horrible in debate last night but he still sucked. Mitt destroyed Rick Perry. All Perry talked about was Big Oil and Energy companies to every answer. He sounded like a uneducated spokesman for Exxon-Mobil. When asked about his economic and jobs plan he said he would get one to the public in three days. Dang Rick, not everyone wants to be a roustabout for oil companies like the illegals living in Texas. Put a fork in Rick, he is a loser just like Ron Paul.
runningchance 5 months ago
I hope they realize that none of them will be president
Blindianboy 5 months ago
Compelling arguments..I'm voting for that Ronald Reagan guy.....
mrbriscoe2001 5 months ago in playlist Dartmouth GOP economy debate
Julianaaaaaaa
derekaiton 5 months ago
:40 loser
gingowitch 5 months ago in playlist Dartmouth GOP economy debate
None of them have a single idea that can actually get accomplished. It's all about the sound bites.
Calimantalkin 5 months ago
There are no sane people left in the Republican party.
Richardgwm 5 months ago
@Richardgwm That's why this country is in the shit hole.
dodocrest 5 months ago in playlist Dartmouth GOP economy debate
@Richardgwm Exactly right. Bob Dole said the same very recently.
kaysandesses 5 months ago
So Same old GOP crap, cut taxes, deregulate, start more wars. That's worked so well till now.
petehjr1 5 months ago 10
@petehjr1 you obviously haven't been listening to ron paul
mredwards0915 4 months ago
wonderful editing.
diemythtruth 5 months ago
The Republicans are always preaching conservatism and less government, but their rancid support of the growing police state is testament to the fact that they are neither for conservatism or the Constitution...Hopefully Paul will run as an Independent if he does not win nomination and I guarantee he will shock the world
.
galarius 5 months ago
@galarius
If Ron Paul runs as an independent, we'll for certain get 0bama for four more years. I know you Paulies don't care but most Americans know that would be the end of America. That's why I believe the Paulie cult is nothing more than a sleazy tactic of 0bama and company. The cult members probably don't know it and I'm pretty sure even Ron Paul doesn't know it but it's obvious that 0bama has more to gain from it that anybody else.
qpwillie 5 months ago
@qpwillie ..yeah, we are the cult, not the demonic warmongering phony conservative dildos masquerading as traditional americans...traditional americans who want to support corporate cronyism and the destruction of the american way of life for middle class america....herman cain, mitt romney, and rick perry will all give the economy a short, temporary boost...then their policies will simply cause things to revert to where we are already headed.GOOD PLAN!Real change is needed,and that is Ron Paul
galarius 5 months ago
@galarius
You don't need to tell me anything about what the Paulies believe. To you there are "liberals", "neocons" and Ron Paul - period.
Any group which follows ONE leader and believes he's infallible is a cult. You rudely filibuster every conversation you are aware of and claim your leader is the one and only salvation for America and the world.
Most people see you like a swarm of gnats who persistently annoy them while they're trying to converse about something sensible.
qpwillie 5 months ago
@qpwillie - Herman Cain made Ron Paul look like a complete moron in last nights debate with his answer about his past association with FED. Ron Paul and his goofy supporters will never end the FED. Giving money to the Ron Paul campaign is throwing your cash away. Voting for Ron Paul is wasting your vote. Romney will be nominee and possibly Cain as VP nominee. Both of these men understand class warfare and are preapproved by Wall St, FED, Banking and major Corps. Let us all say Amen.
runningchance 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@runningchance Cain brazenly lied about his comments on the fed. LOOK IT UP!
tempchannel1 5 months ago
@tempchannel1 - No he didn't, he made your silly Messiah Ron Paul look like a idiot so you now say Cain lied. Get a life and become a legitimate part of the GOP. This is class warfare and Ron Paul doesn't believe in waging war. Voting for Ron Paul is wasting your vote.
runningchance 5 months ago
@runningchance YES HE DID! See for yourself: watch?v=8sJV-baQ40A
tempchannel1 5 months ago
@qpwillie ..well if that is what most 'people' see then most people aren't even humans, they are media programmed slaves like yourself....so "I" fillibuster every conversationb.wow, i must have alot of time on my hands....Actually Ron Paul has the most divergent following of any politician out there...Young, old, conservative, independent.....A more accurate definition of a 'cult' would be people who get their talking ponts from any network news and fatboy frontman limbaugh...
galarius 5 months ago
@galarius
"so "I" fillibuster every conversationb.wow,"
A better educated person would understand that "you" can be singular or plural.
No, the rest of us are humans. It's just that you Paulies are a superior race. It wouldn't be fair to compare us to your superiority.
Hmm, "superior race". Now where have I heard that before?
qpwillie 5 months ago
@qpwillie ...no, it wouldn't!Now if you wil excuse me i have to do some work so i can support all you guys who have time to respond over and over again, repeating the same gibberish...It is funny that you think Paulians have the superiority complex when we are the ones who want to put the man in office who will help the most people.Ron Paul's voting record speaks for itself.Listen up or pay the price.The GOP establishment are only beholden to corporations, not people
galarius 5 months ago
@galarius - that is the problem with you ignorant Paulamites, whenever someone doesn't acknowledge dumb old Ron Paul as the "Savior" you say they aren't humans or they are enslaved by the media. You Paulamites are the same weirdos that believe in BigFoot. Grow up and support Mitt Romney. Romney understands global economics, banking and major corps. Less than 3% of the American people want Ron Paul. If you vote for Ron Paul, you are wasting your vote. Don't be a fool, vote Romney!
runningchance 5 months ago
@runningchance .well, i don't agree.Mitt Romney understands corporations because he gives them oral for contributions.Seriously, Mitt Romney?the guy is as fake as it gets.Paul has a voting record that proves his commitment to conservatism.Any poll showing Paul and Obama going head to head is neck and neck, so 3% is a fabrication.Ignoring his strong poll numbers doesn't help your argument.Paul will get more independent and young voters than any of those other twits, which is needed to win.
galarius 5 months ago
@galarius - No Sir, Ron Paul has no chance at all against Obama. Obama would win by a landslide. You are being manipulated. Ron Paul can't even defeat Bachmann who is next to last in legitimate GOP polls. Stop the foolishness and become a good standing voter for the traditional GOP. There are no evil forces or conspiracies against Ron Paul, the fact is only about 3% of the USA voters support him.
runningchance 5 months ago
@runningchance Well that's all false of course since he's polling in third place right now. A vote for Romney is a wasted vote since he cannot beat Obama. Ron Paul and his solid 10% support will not endorse or vote for Romney if he becomes the nominee, which means Romney will be just as useless as McCain against Obama. Your choice is clear, Ron Paul or Obama.
ditkuss 5 months ago
@ditkuss - that is ridiculous and people like you Paulamites will be to blame for what goes wrong in the USA. If you think for one second that Ron Paul could defeat Obama you are crazier than Ron Paul himself. There are no conspiracies against Ron Paul, I say legitimate polls have him at 3% support from registered voters and you say he is 10% of the GOP. Even if Paul somehow managed to finish 3rd, which won't happen, Romney will be the GOP nominee. Now grow up and shut up with the foolishness.
runningchance 5 months ago 3
@runningchance So you're choosing Obama to be our next president. Romney cannot win the Presidency without the 10% of the GOP that supports Ron Paul and will never endorse Romney. I'm trying to get this through your greazy head but you're being incredibly angry and stubborn on this point. Obama it is then I guess.
ditkuss 5 months ago
@ditkuss - Ron Paul is not a legitimate candidate and doesn't uphold to traditional values of the GOP. Ron Paul will not be the nominee. I refuse to even entertain the thought of Ron Paul ever being the Republican Nominee. Ron Paul is a trouble maker that would do more damage to the USA than Obama and Bush put together. Ron Paul's attacks against the FED are unacceptable and would make the USA a 3rd world country. His rhetoric is fun to listen to but the reality is that he's not fit as a leader.
runningchance 5 months ago
@runningchance why are his attacks on the FED unnaceptable?
2plus2make4 5 months ago
@ditkuss - that is my entire point, you Paulamite cult members would rather sacrifice our banking system, FED, major corps, and wall st than to use your vote wisely. Voting for Ron Paul is wasting your vote. He is a joke and nobody likes him or his goofy way of thinking.
runningchance 5 months ago
@runningchance I just told you that voting for Romney is a wasted vote because he can't beat Obama. And you chose Obama.
ditkuss 5 months ago
@ditkuss So you honestly think that this fabled 10% (which in reality is single digits) will be enough to nominate Ronster and be able to garner enough support to beat Obama in the general election? The moderates have decided every general election in this country for decades. They will do so again in 2012. The only GOP candidate who has a real shot at attracting those moderates is Huntsman and the GOP Masters have already decided Romney is their man.
kaysandesses 5 months ago
@runningchance ...you can keep repeating meaningless words all day long, no one else is listening except all the other foxnews/limbaugh slaves..and you guys are getting smaller in number by the day.Paul has been in Congress for how long now?I guess that is because he isn't a politician wwhose ideas aren't taken seriously by those who get a chance to listen to him.And that is your whole goal, to stop people from listening.Too bad the military doesn' agree, Ron paul is their choice.Take that
galarius 5 months ago
@qpwillie - The Paulamites are truly a cult and explaining to them to be logical is out of the question. I seriously doubt that Ron Paul will have the financing to run as a independent. He only has a backing of about 3% but that 3% could actually give Obama victory if the Paulamites wasted their votes on Ron Paul. At this point I believe Ron Paul will drop out and just keep his mouth shut.
runningchance 5 months ago
@runningchance
You're right. They also trash everybody who doesn't happen to be Ron Paul. That's why I suspect 0bama might be behind the whole thing.
qpwillie 5 months ago
@runningchance
I've seen several of them state that they hopeed 0bama does get reelected as a punishment to us for not supporting Ron Paul.
qpwillie 5 months ago
@qpwillie - arguing with them does no good, they are blind to common sense. If Obama is re-elected, the Paulamites only have themselves to blame. They are truly a cult. If you talk to any of them, they actually believe that Ron Paul is going to be President of the USA. He is last and after his poor performance last night he just needs to drop out and tell his supporters to go with whoever wins the GOP nomination but the Paulamites are poor losers and think everything is a conspiracy.
runningchance 5 months ago
@runningchance
Of course you're right about not arguing with them. I doubt even a trained professional could deprogram them.
If, or more accurately WHEN Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination, they don't care if 0bama is reelected. They don't see any difference between 0bama and anybody else who isn't Ron Paul. So yes, it's a cult in the truest sense of the term.
qpwillie 5 months ago
@qpwillie - they think everything is a conspiracy against Ron Paul, they don't understand that Obama is using them as tools to his victory. Could you actually see Ron Paul in a one on one Presidential debate against Obama? It is just a reality that Obama would destroy him. I know the Paulamites believe that Ron Paul would win but the other 97% of the USA believes Ron Paul is a nut. Of course that is just fiction because Ron Paul doesn't deserve and will never be the GOP Nominee.
runningchance 5 months ago
The GOP establishment is AMAZING.They only have one canidate that people are actually fired up about, and that is PAUL.But their addiction to war and corporate proliferation is going to cause them to nominate another phony conservative who will do absolutely NOTHING to correct the fundamental issues of job outsourcing and the continued decline of the American way of life..
galarius 5 months ago
The government needs to get off the backs of the businesses.That is why capitalism is failing,because there's a ton of socialist garbage on it's back! 92% of all failed economies in the US, are presided over by democrats. The useful idiots who vote democrat, need to do research that's at least a little more involved than hearing what the creeps in the media tell them. Who defended slavery? Who had EVERY segregationist on their rolls?Who came up with the federal tax and social security scams?WHO?
GrandFunker 5 months ago